Jan
22
2010
Sproul and Wright: Judging by the Paperwork vs. Judging by the Heart
I thought this was a very astute insight by Doug Wilson:
The irony is that the mistake Wright makes about first century Jews, R.C. makes about the Reformed, and the valuable insight that Wright offers pastorally about some of the tight-shoed Reformed, he declines to apply to first century Jews.
In short, R.C. judges the Reformed tradition by the paperwork, and first century Jews by the heart.
Wright judges the Reformed by the heart, and judges the first century Jews by the paperwork.
Read the whole thing to see what he means.
16 Comments
I think one of the reason’s Sproul might not see the issue of Justification by JBF alone, is the way it comes out in Evangelical rhetoric about roman catholics.
If they don’t confess verbally that they are alone putting their faith in Christ alone for their justification, (which they don’t) then the faith they have in Jesus is suspect, because its obviously “mixed” with all this other stuff.
So Pdugg, quick clarification…Are you saying that catholics who trust in Christ to be their all satisfying treasure but do no assent to jbf alone have a suspect faith?
Wilson is clever writer, often too clever for his own good. I often sense a great relish in being clever. His point is true enough, but not as big a deal as he thinks it is.
I don’t get Wilson and his whole Federal vision thinking , which I think is a mass of confusion.
Even if RC is guilty of what Wilson says (which I’m far from convinced form this article) , Wright’s view of justification is very troubling and I fear where it will lead. I have tried over and over to read Wright but find his writing and thought process more confusing and overrated.
I don’t think I am smart enough to get Wilson. I thought he was giving reasons for for one position and then it wound up being for an opposite position. I am confused……Also on another note, in lite of the fact that the only place in the Bible where faith and alone appear together is in James 2 when it says we are not justified by faith alone, don’t you think it makes a lot more sense to be way more charitable to ou catholic and orthodox brothers and sisters? BTw I think Wright is off on justification and I believe in jbf alone.
Charitable? Yes.
Believe that they are our brothers and sisters in Christ? That’s a different question.
As Wilson pointed out in his blogpost, there’s a difference between an official theology that gives lip service to grace and the theology that is deep in one’s heart and lived out. Here’s an example of what I mean from a pop-RC apologist:
“The bottom line here is this: Jesus Christ did not suffer and die so that we don’t have to. Jesus Christ suffered and died so that our good works offered up in him can be truly pleasing and salvific before God. And indeed, Jesus didn’t suffer and die so that we don’t have to suffer and die, he suffered and died so that our suffering and death could be salvific.” -Tim Staples
“don’t you think it makes a lot more sense to be way more charitable to our catholic and orthodox brothers and sisters?
Yes. It makes sense to do if/when they’re co-belligerents on issues such as the sanctity of life, biblical marriage, and religious freedom.
“BTw I think Wright is off on justification and I believe in jbf alone.”
I agree again.
Perhaps we also might be more charitable to our anti-Manhattan Declaration brothers and sisters, too…
As long as the conservative anti-Manhattan Declaration Protestants are charitable towards the conservative pro-Manhattan Declaration Protestants….
Hm, I’m not sure we should put qualifications on it. “I’ll only show you love and grace if you show it to me.” Really?
Is that a tacit admission that the conservative anti-Manhattan Declaration Protestants are NOT charitable towards the conservative pro-Manhattan Declaration Protestants?
If so, thank you for the admission.
I’ve found it helpful to compare James 2 to Romans 4, not looking for a disagreement, but to see how they are in harmony.
In Romans 4, Paul affirms justification by faith, and cites Abraham’s justification in Genesis 15:6 as an example.
In James 2, James references Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice Isaac in Gen 22 as an example of his “justification by works” that completed and fulfilled (ἐτελειώθη in v22 and ἐπληρώθη in v23) the justification by faith. It’s a tricky passage, but when interpreted in context, I think the reader is able to discern that James and Paul are not in contradiction.
I’m no theologian, so take this with a grain of salt, but it seems to me that if any distinction is made, it’s that Paul uses the term to refer to the moment when we are declared just before God, while James uses the term to refer to evidence that proves our just status before God.
The concept that true, saving faith is always accompanied by works is a theme common in scripture, which differentiates on more than one occasion between nominal belief, and actual saving faith; i.e. submission to Jesus as Lord and Savior. Compare, for example, the Parable of the Sower in Matthew 13 – there are some who receive the gospel with joy, indicating at least some level of belief, but when that faith is tested, it becomes clear that they didn’t have true, saving faith.
It’s worth noting that when Hebrews 12 refers to Jesus as “the author and perfecter of our faith,” it uses the word τελειωτὴν for “perfecter”, which is closely related to ἐτελειώθη (“completed/perfected”) in James 2:22.
I love how the comment section ends up about Wilson and not about Wright or Sproul. Let’s strain out some gnats guys.
“..Self righteousness can feed upon doctrines, as well as upon works; and a man may have the heart of a Pharisee, while his head is stored with orthodox notions of the unworthiness of the creature and the riches of free grace”"
How can anyone know if they are not self-righteous? I love the truth, and the teachings of Jesus, becuase they come from Jesus’ heart. I love the Bible, becuase the Lord gave it to me.
Sometimes we try to refine things too much methinks.
[...] Taylor points out an interesting discussion by Doug Wilson – Sproul and Wright: Judging by the Paperwork vs. Judging by the Heart. Taylor quotes the following gem from Wilson: The irony is that the mistake Wright makes about [...]
Anyone gone through Galatians recently? NT Wright is pretty close as we get to a modern day Judiaser.
I go to Apostle Paul for my authority of what Justification is. He is very clear, very easy to follow, and of course includes all the arguments. Nothing new under the sun here.
After reading the article I’ll say this. RC Sproul is easy to understand, NT Wright one can understand. You don’t have to agree to understand.
Doug Wilson consistently tries to argue that NT Wright is Reformed, or should I say ultra-reformed and this is where I would say Douglas Wilson is confusing because he’s confused.
This whole debate would be much easier to follow if the “fv’s” would realize that they jumped ship and just come up with their own confessions instead of constantly trying to hijack the reformed confessions.